Thread: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

Originally Posted by maxparrish

Now real discrimination is the era of Jim Crow, segregation, and thousands of lynchings. It is when a black man was not permitted to enroll in a public college, who couldn't get a job that amounted to more than that of a bell hop or janitor, or when his church was burned and his housing relegated to unheated and kerosene lit shacks. Real discrimination was when a black dancer or singer at a white club was not permitted to sit at a table, and who had to eat in the Kitchen during his/her breaks. Real discrimination was when no hotel in a City accepted black lodgers, which required them to sleep on tour buses or lodge with black families. THAT my friend, is REAL discrimination.

Today LGBT face next to nothing, other than State acknowledgement of "marriage" (soon to be ended in the remaining states). They make more money than hetrosexuals, they work in every industry at every level (including CEOs), they are not (and never have been) excluded in any housing, hotels, restaurants, state schools, or relegated to the work of bell hops and janitors. Even the worst era, the raiding of gay bath-houses and being arrested for solicitation in public parks is NOTHING compared to what blacks went through.

You don't know what you're talking about and you obviously have no idea what we went through. You're right, it was nothing compared to what blacks went through; it was worse in a lot of ways. Being relegated to the work of bell hops and janitors is nothing in comparison to the State regarding being gay as tantamount to treason and forcibly institutionalizing you. If you think LGBT people never experienced those things then you have a lot of learning to do.

Didn't read the whole thread, but I have a solution. Allow the law, but include a corollary that states that the business in question should publicly announce what group that are choosing to not serve... that way those who do not want to associate with them will know that this is a "safe zone" and members of that group will avoid that place of business altogether... and anyone else who has issue with the situation.

Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy

. Allow the law, but include a corollary that states that the business in question should publicly announce what group that are choosing to not serve .

This idea is pretty good.
However, I doubt too many businesses would be in favor of this plan.
The threat of organized boycotts would be too great.
The bad publicity might hurt business.
I think that some people's "deeply held" beliefs are trumped by the almighty dollar.

Originally Posted by maxparrish

narcissistic rant

So tell me. Since you have chosen that you will not listen to LGBTs, why should I choose to listen to you?

Originally Posted by radioman

This idea is pretty good.
However, I doubt too many businesses would be in favor of this plan.
The threat of organized boycotts would be too great.
The bad publicity might hurt business.
I think that some people's "deeply held" beliefs are trumped by the almighty dollar.

Though I agree with you, I would see that as cowardly. if the business owner is choosing to not take payment from one group of people, why not publicize it so that it is known... or are their beliefs not strong enough to stand up to that scrutiny? They are already putting their beliefs ahead of the almighty dollar.

Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy

Though I agree with you, I would see that as cowardly.

It is cowardly.

if the business owner is choosing to not take payment from one group of people, why not publicize it so that it is known... or are their beliefs not strong enough to stand up to that scrutiny?

The owners' beliefs may be strong, but I'll bet if your plan had been part of this bill, the bill would never have passed.

They are already putting their beliefs ahead of the almighty dollar.

They are willing to sacrifice SOME money.
Rejecting an occasional paying customer is tolerable.
Facing a possible organized boycott isn't tolerable.
If their business practices are publicized, they would potentially lose a LOT of money.
Even in a conservative state such as Indiana, a significant percentage of the populace would reject such bigoted business practices.
I hope.

The national backlash has been fierce and Indiana Governor Mike Pence now seems to realize that the RFRA he signed into law was a huge political miscalculation that has the potential to do irreparable harm to the State of Indiana. He now says that the Indiana legislature will convene this week to "clarify" the Indiana RFRA legislation.

Indiana governor supports 'clarifying the intent' of religious objection law


Protesters gather Saturday outside the Indiana statehouse

Pence and other supporters of the law contend discrimination claims are overblown and insist it will keep the government from compelling people to provide services they find objectionable on religious grounds. They also maintain that courts haven't allowed discrimination under similar laws covering the federal government and 19 other states.

But state Rep. Ed DeLaney, an Indianapolis Democrat, said Indiana's law goes further than those laws and opens the door to discrimination. "This law does not openly allow discrimination, no, but what it does is create a road map, a path to discrimination," he told the crowd, which stretched across the south steps and lawn of the Statehouse. "Indiana's version of this law is not the same as that in other states. It adds all kinds of new stuff and it moves us further down the road to discrimination."

Zach Adamson, a Democrat on Indianapolis' City-County Council, said to cheers that the law has nothing to do with religious freedom but everything to do with discrimination. "This isn't 1950 Alabama; it's 2015 Indiana," he told the crowd, adding that the law has brought embarrassment on the state.

On Saturday, the founder of Angie's List said the consumer review service is suspending its plans for a $40 million expansion in Indianapolis because of Indiana's new religious objections law.